What about mkstemp vs. mktemp in binutils?

[Christian Jönsson]

I just came to think for a moment about using mkstemp vs. mktemp in
the binutils sources. Now, when configuring libiberty on my
linux-sparc libc6-2.2.5 based system I get no mkstemp.

checking for mkstemps... no

When compiling binutils I get (several similar) complaints like this:

gcc-3.0 -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -g -o .libs/size size.o bucomm.o version.o filemode.o  ../bfd/.libs/libbfd.so ../libiberty/libiberty.a -Wl,--rpath -Wl,/usr/local/binutils-cvs/lib
bucomm.o: In function `make_tempname':
/home/chj/src/objdir/binutils/../../binutils/bucomm.c:236: the use of `mktemp' is dangerous, better use `mkstemp'

Is this something to worry about? 

Cheers,

/ChJ